Is Bankroll Management Hogwash?

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/c...sky0806-2.html

This article is titled "Pros versus Wannabes" and is worth reading but this is what caught my attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D. Sklansky

So what skills really separate the day to day pro or expert from those merely good players?... I will mention some of those things shortly but first I will tell you what it is not...

9. It is not bankroll management. Another excuse unsuccessful poker players make is that they would win if they didn't overplay their bankroll. There is some truth to that but not in the long run. If for instance you get into a $30-$60 game with $5,000 to your name, you are a favorite to go bust no matter how well you play. But not if you have done this several times. Eventually you should get lucky enough with that buy-in to bring it up to a point where you will never look back. If you don't, it's because you can't beat that game.

---

I am interested in this idea because it seems to advocate playing way above your bankroll if you know that you can beat a game.

Well going bust really isn't an issue if you can keep buying back into the game, is it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaNutsInYoEye

Well going bust really isn't an issue if you can keep buying back into the game, is it?

---

You've taken this completely out of context. Imagine you flip burgers at 8$/hr (min wage here). Work for 25 hours, and go buy back in to 1/2. The implication he makes is that you don't have the money but you could in some way (work/backers) get the money for a buyin.

Actually you're taking it out of context. They aren't advocating playing out of your bankroll. They're just saying that BR management isn't what seperates great player from the merely good ones.

For what it's worth, bankroll mgmt is bunk until you reach a level where you can't rebuy.

Also, ask yourself what you want out of this game? I've found peace playing at stakes where I make enough money for nice things, but a really terrible night won't bother me much. I just focus on playing and having fun.

Then again, in my favorite game I'm well over 80% winning sessions (it's not Hold'em.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fnord

For what it's worth, bankroll mgmt is bunk until you reach a level where you can't rebuy.

---

I don't quite understand this statement. Elaborate?

Assuming that you went completely broke. would you start at the bottom with a modest investment and work your way back up, or jump to a level closer to what you were at, knowing you could beat the game?

From my understanding there are two points to BR management. One is to deal with variance/down swings and the other as a gauge of when you can move up in levels because you have enough to handle the variance/downswings at higher stakes. The crutch is that bad players don't realize how bad they truly are and too often blame losses on variance and not themselves. One way bad players can get their bankroll back up is finding a worse player.

So in Sklansky's example why is someone with 5k in a 30-60 games is destined to go broke- because they don't have the bankroll to survive the downswings and/or they might be playing for their whole stack on one hand and lose- but that doesnt mean they can't beat the stakes. If you are a good player eventually you will hit a streak that brings your 5k up to a sustainable level and because you are good you will now best the game in the long run. If you are a bad player- nuff said.

I think this is a differences of deffinition thing.

I define my bankroll as the sum of money I am prepared to play poker with for the forseeable future (forever). I can't lose it and replace it when I feel like.

So if I buy in for $5000 twice then I consider myself burnt through a $10,000 bankroll. Not a $5000 bankroll twice.

So, in my mind, br management is essential to seperate me from an amateur. If I don't manage my bankroll and I go bust then I actually am bust and up shit creek. But I can see what sklansky is saying, he just defines "bankroll" differently.

Two aspects to bankroll:

Literally, of course, it means "all the money with which you can play poker" (presumably, without endangering your financial well-being)

The thing that happens when/if you bust is all of a sudden you have time -- the time you previously spent at the table. You can and maybe should still consider this poker time and spend it earning $ for your new roll. Just a thought.

oh, yes, I forgot what the "two aspects" were going to be...

everything we do in poker is a probability, rarely do we get all the money in with a 100% chance to win, anda t times we get it all in as an underdog.
Thus, bankroll management covers the mathemeatical probability that we will lose as a favourite several times in a row, because at some point its bound to happen.
I could theoretically sit at 12 1knl tables with my bankroll, forgetting for a moment im probabl a break even player at those stakes at the minute, the variance caused by the aggressiveness of those games will make me go busto in no time.